Monday, May 19, 2008

Obama and the Jews

There was an outstanding Op-Ed piece by Thomas Friedman in Sunday's New York Times. Friedman begins by listing several statements attributed to Barack Obama: Obama once said there has to be “an end” to the Israeli “occupation” of the West Bank “that began in 1967.” ; and that any peace agreement “must establish Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinian people.” and “the establishment of the state of Palestine is long overdue. The Palestinian people deserve it.”

These statements circulate as an attempt to show that Obama is anti-Israel, and pro-Palestinian. The statements are all accurate, however, they were not spoken by Obama. They are all statements made by George W. Bush over the last two years. George W. Bush, the friend of Israel.

Friedman's editorial states correctly that America now has a bi-partisan approach to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict that can only be satisfied with a two-state solution. He states, correctly, that most American Jews ask NOT whether a Presidential candidate is good for Israel, but whether that candidate is good for American interests. For me, this includes health-care; the environment; human rights; the Supreme Court.

But to use statements made by Bush in an attempt to undermine Obama's campaign is ludicrous. It is another example of how the Right Wing spins truth into something frightening. It is another example of mis-information and obfuscation, and I am sick to death of it. I am sick of an Administration that uses fear as a weapon against its own people.

There is another ongoing argument people use against Obama. That is his lack of experience. In my opinion, that argument is codswallop, because it holds no real weight. That particular spin is akin to saying that unless you've been President, you can't be President. If you think you can, or if you think you can't, you're right.

14 comments:

I saw this post and actually thought of you ( because we had been discussin this...and I was working on my Appeasement post...which I had to put off because of the 75,000)....so I am glad you posted this...

anyways...somehow we will get through these times and come together, as a nation....but this I do know it won't be because of the "media"...it will be because of people like you....

But to use statements made by Bush in an attempt to undermine Obama's campaign is ludicrous.

Though pretty par for the course in the 'Thuglican camp. I don't think that Democrats realize the danger we're in. An op-ed at WaPo today (maybe yesterday) outlined a pretty clear strategy for achieving a McCain presidency, and it turns on exploiting the current division in the Democratic party...again par for the course, but there's no need for us to help the process along.

Ah, Kvatch, this is the biggest fear I have: that, upon the nomination of either Obama or Clinton, the supporters of the non-nominated candidate sit back and do nothing.

I support Obama - but if Hillary Clinton becomes the nominee, then I will actively support her. I would hope that other Obama supporters would do the same. But when I cruise around the blog-sphere, I see supporters of Obama saying terrible things about Mrs. Clinton, and Clinton supporters saying equally terrible things about Mr. Obama. It's the attack of personality rather than a discussion of issues that affect all of us.

Let's have a real discussion: who has the best health care plan? Who is going to bring jobs back to the USA? Who is going to address the issue of undocumented immigrants in a way that encompasses their dignity? Who is going to demand the auto-industry make available energy efficient vehicles? That sort of thing.

You're right, Froggy. Democrats do fall into the trap that the Neo-Cons set. We're a mess.

We can not afford to sit back regardless of who the nominee is but I think President McCain is already a given in this facade of a Democracy. Only in pert thanks to the complicit MSM. McCain will see to it that Bush's mis agenda continues. There should be a peaceful Israel and Palestine side by side but that will never happen unless Iran, Syria and others I will leave alone for now are brought under control via war. That was the original reason for attacking Iraq to get our military back in the middle east. If McCain looks in doubt Bush will attack Iran first or we will get another timely "terrorist attack" The awesome power amassed under Bush will not be allowed in Dem hands period. That said we the people must persevere!

Patriot:why are fear mongering? We have a chance to turn this country around- I thought you were rooting for Obama...for Change...for getting out of Iraq...why are sipping the "terra" stuff again...stop...we all need to pull together...get out and support this Effort....Bush and Mcsame want us sitting home worried, handwringing...and repressed...Comeon Man..we have 240 days to get Bush and McCain out of Office...Millions are putting their lives on the line we can do THIS....No more President McCain talk....let's pull together and FIGHT back...with our words, our hearts and our souls....

Patriot, with an approval rating as low as Bush's, I am not certain they'd be able to pull off such a scenario. However, the Project for a New American Century, the NeoCon "think tank", had a position paper that described how we would bring "Democracy" into the Middle East, beginning with Iraq.

Enigma, I was watching "House" last night - and there was a scene where one of the doctors was in the bathroom - plastered to the wall behind her was a bumper sticker that read "Vote For Change - 08". "House" is on Fox.

Thanks for posting this--I have dealt with a local guy who is fixated on the Iraeli/Palestinian issue- he sides with Palestine & would have us all think that conflict is THE NUMBER ONE issue for this country. He accuses Obama of being pledged to Israel & stops short of saying it is Obamas fault for the conflict in general!!!I tred & tried to reason with him- as did other members of the local peace community- asking him to realize his persepective & priority is not necessarily shared by everyone else. But he was like a damned pit bull on this topic, going as far as accusing a 50 year old peace group as being led by "Zionists". Ugh!I could not take it anymore. I told him to take me off his list.The points you make here are excellent. The new president will inherit a massive list of problems & programs in full blown crisis.the pres must figure out what things are priorities, and work from there.Personally, having this country telling other countries how to function, in the midst of our dysfunction is crazy.We have a lot of things to deal with on our own-- get our own house in order, before we can even think about interefering or involvement in other countries affairs.This crazed writer insists the US is partner in terrorism afflicted on the Palestinians. It is all one way, in his (closed) mind.Yes, the US has been in bed with Israel & China- both of which need help & reform.

But the president has the ability to make direct change in OUR country & in OUR country's terrorist activities worldwide.

These are things the president can do within our realms of change. As for experience if you tally ACTUAL experience, Obama's 2 terms in the Illinois Senate & his Congressional Senate position are more than Clinton's 2 terms as a Senator.

I do not count *first lady* duties as hands on experience. Watching a painter paint your house does not constitute experience.

But watching the McBush/Bush-McCain clips pratteling on & echoing these thoughts-- about how *we don't talk to enemies* this week was a riot.Is that anything like *we don;t torture*???

Obama went on to say other Presidents HAVE spoken with leaders we don;t agree with- he sited Kennedy & Roosevelt & named a few others.

This idea that we must have enemies, and we can not talk to enemies, makes about as much sense as invading Iraq.

Thanks for the sick & dysfunctional perspective George & John.

They tell us we should learn from history, so as to not repeat mistakes.

Closed doors & fear-- anyone had enough?

I remember back to the initial repub debates. McCain was the one who seemed the most out of touch- so when you put him in a debate with Obama- McCain does not stand a chance.

I've read lots of statements from voters who have voted repub all their lives, who can;t support this regime or more of the same.So I have hope that some people out there still ahve brain cells firing, or some inner sense of humanity & responsibilty that will vote their conscience.

Who in their right mind (pardon the pun) would vote for more of the same?

Fran, there is a simple reality: for the mid-East to flourish, Israel must exist. So must a Palestinian state. When Anwar Sadat was President of Egypt, his historic overture to Menachim Begin opened the first locked door to peace. Unfortunately, the other doors have remained locked. But we here in America, most of us having never been there, have a knee-jerk reaction either condemning Israel or condemning Palesinians as the sole culprit. Neither is true.

As for McBush - the far Right is completely out of touch with reality - fueled by greed and their own vested interests, they care not one iota for the greater good. And as more and more Republicans wake up to how their party has been destroyed, perhaps we will see real change.